A simple static model for understanding the dynamic behavior of programs

Program Comprehension, Workshop Proceedings

Volumn 12, Issue , 2004, Pages 46-51

  Kelsen, Pierre ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LUXEMBOURG   (Luxembourg)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DYNAMIC MODELS; HIGH-LEVEL DEBUGGING; UNIFIED MODELING LANGUAGE (UML);

CODES (SYMBOLS); DYNAMIC PROGRAMMING; GRAPH THEORY; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PROGRAM DEBUGGING; USER INTERFACES;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE;

EID: 10044248674     PISSN: 10928138     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (16)

1. Alcatel, I-Logix, Kennedy-Carter, Inc. Kabira Technologies, Inc. Project Technology, Rational Software Corporation, and Telelogic AB. Action semnatics for the uml. In Document ad/2001-03-01. OMG, 2000.
2. Elliot J. Chikofsky and James H. Cross, II. Reverse engineering and design recovery: A taxonomy. In Robert S. Arnold, editor, Software Reengineering, pages 54-58. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1992.
3. Jong-Deok Choi, Barton P. Miller, and Robert H. B. Netzer. Techniques for debugging parallel programs with flowback analysis. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 13(4):491-530, October 1991.
4. ITU-T. Specification and Description Language(SDL). Recommendation Z.100., 11/99.
5. Dean Jerding and Spencer Rugaber. Using visualization for architectural localization and extraction. In Ira Baxter, Alex Quilici, and Chris Verhoef, editors, Proceedings of the Fourth Working Conference on Reverse Engineering. IEEE Computer Society Press Los Alamitos California, 1997.
6. M. Kamkar, P. Fritzson, and N. Shahmehri. Interprocedural dynamic slicing applied to interprocedural data flow testing. In Proceedings of the Conference on Software Maintenance, pages 386-395. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1993.
7. Bogdan Korel and Janusz Laski. Dynamic program slicing. Information Processing Letters, 29(3):155-163, October 1988.
8. Kai Koskimies and Hanspeter Mössenböck. Scene: Using scenario diagrams and active text for illustrating object-oriented programs. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 366-375. IEEE Computer Society Press / ACM Press, 1996.
9. Danny B. Lange and Yuichi Nakamura. Object-oriented program tracing and visulization. IEEE Computer, 30(5):63-70, May 1997.
10. Hausi A. Müller, Kenny Wong, and Scott R. Tilley. Understanding software systems using reverse engineering technology. In V. S. Alagar and R. Missaoui, editors, Object-Oriented Technology for Database and Software Systems, pages 240-252. World Scientific, 1995.
11. Object Management Group. Unified Modeling Language, March 2003. statut : Version 1.5, http://www.omg.org/docs/formal/03-03-01.pdf.
12. Wim De Pauw, Erik Jensen, Nick Mitchell, Gary Sevitsky, John Vlissides, and Jeaha Yang. Visualizing the execution of Java programs. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2269:151-162, 2002.
13. C. Raistrick, I. Wilkie, and C. Carter. Executable uml (xuml). In Proceedings 3rd International Conference on the Unified Modeling Language UML, 2000.
14. F. Tip. A survey of program slicing techniques. Journal of programming languages, 3:121-189, 1995. Surveys the state-of-the-art in program slicing and gives many references to the literature.
15. G. A. Venkatesh. The semantic approach to program slicing. In Proceedings of the Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 107-119, 1991.
16. M. Weiser. Program slicing. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 439-449. IEEE Computer Society Press, March 1981.